Talk:The Secret: Forum
Question on Deception, Eastern Philosophy I apologise if this article is already extensively covered. I am not seeking to dismantle the concept of the secret I believe it is real and true. I was concerned of a few things when watching the movie. The Secret movie gives a substantial amount of hype to how we have been deceived by "the powers that be", by being left ignorant of this Secret. I have been searching forums etc and thought that deeper understanding would be easily accessible of these great deceptions. It seems this 'deception plot' has been given to us by the directors and 'The Secret Teachers' to trigger an emotion of intrigue. All this deception is understandable that it is used a a plot fix but is it really relative? And if so, where is the background referencing? Another thing that concerns me is all these teachers are business tycoons. I thought that there would be present day characters like Ghandi featured on The Secret. There are many great sages that exist today, why has there humble opinions and practice been left out? The idea of God and the Universe is briefly explored. I personally learned of the Laws Of Attraction through Eastern Philosophy. Don't Worry, Be Happy conceived by Meher Baba was one of the first great stones cast into the mainstream American consciousness with the concept of The Secret. A Sage of present is Louix Dor Dempriey. A local of Lugana Hills, California. This is fantastic that The Secret is coming at large. If anyone can refer me to the right place to read of The Secret's history, where it was buried etc would be great. Response # I agree with you that to some extent the deception plot is a form of hype intended to generate interest in the movie -- and it is effective. It may not be easy to market a concept on the basis that it has been around for a long time but no one has taken notice of it! Deception creates an element of intrigue, which the movie trailer is certainly intended to generate. # On the other hand, it is quite true that spiritual and occult knowledge of life has often been regarded as secret in the past and only divulged to initiatives for a number of reasons -- one because despite the claims by Secret proponents to the contrary, The Secret method can be utilized for negative as well as positive ends. It is power and power has a double edge. The universal forces that respond to negative invocations differs from those that respond to the positive, but the basic method is the same. # Finding a history of The Secret may be problematic for several reasons. The knowledge advocated is as old as human wisdom and present in many cultures. Though the movie may give the impression that it has handed down through the ages, it is not a single tradition or line of succession. It is like asking for a history of spirituality itself -- with one important qualification -- many spiritual traditions turned away from life and though this knowledge may have been available to them for accomplishment in life, they chose not to exercise it. The Secret repackages spiritual methods -- and does so very effectively. # You rightly point out that the ideas behind the Secret can be found in Eastern Philosophy. That is certainly true. As noted in main articles on this site, the spiritual essence of the Secret is contained in the Bhagavad Gita, composed possibly 4000 years ago, and is described in far greater depth than now in Sri Aurobindo's writings 80 years ago. # The method of The Secret is based on the process of creation -- the means by which consciousness creates in the universe. Therefore it has been practiced for all time. However, those that had conscious knowledge of the process in the past most often applied it for spiritual progress rather than material gain. It is the knowledge of yoga applied for human accomplishment. That may be another reason why it has remained 'secret'. It was also the method behind occult practices. # As you point out the teachers selected for the movie are drawn mainly from commercial rather than spiritual fields. This may have been consciously done to avoid getting categorized as religious or spiritual practice. The Secret is presented as a secular method for human accomplishment. It will work for that purpose and clearly this is a huge field with a large and eager waiting market. Hats off the Secret for bringing spiritual knowledge to life! garry 05:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC) Another Response I think the sages did not make the occult and spiritual secrets accessible to masses for some well known secrets: # The sages believed Spirtuality and Life were mutually exclusive. As most people were not seeking spirituality, the secrets never saw the daylight. # Traditionally it was believed that you must deserve what you get. So, if a disciple wanted Spiritual secrets from his teacher, he had to do whatever the teacher asked him to do for years without a guarantee that the disciple would get them. Only a few people could withstand such ordeal. # Misuse of spiritual force by the ignorant could be another valid reason for not revealing the secret. # The great teachers in India and Egypt recorded what they realized in encrypted verses. As education was available only to a chosen few, the secrets never reached the common man. # Another reason could be non-existence of mass cost-effective media such as paper books that could be produced in thousands and distributed easily. The most important factor that brought success to The Secret project is the Internet. The producers could not have reached millions of people if they relied only on the traditional methods. Here you can see a pattern: Thousands of years ago only a few get the secret orally after years of physical service. A few centuries ago songs, poems and literature carried the message to hundreds of people. But they can get the message only when the performers were available. In the last two hundred years these secrets were made available in form of books. So, thousands could buy the books and enrich their knowledge. However, it was difficult to reach globally as there was logistical limitations. At present, with the advent of the Internet all these limitations, including time and space constraints, have been breached. The Secrets are readily available for anyone for almost free. I think the sages and spiritual teachers were full of goodwill for the human beings. They did not, and could not, reveal the secret method then because the world and the sages themselves were not ready for it at that point of time. Looking back, we can say now that there is no deception; it is only evolution. The Secret is a business venture. How many 'genuine sages' would lend their names and faces for fat fees to a commercial venture that may or may not be well received? The grand success of The Secret will inspire many business persons to produce many films and books that would 'reveal' more secrets for the first time and 'expose' the 'deception' of the sages. Get ready. Count down has already started.--Chan 14:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC) An Experiment As an experiment, is asking for something "really good and positive to happen to me", and using all the attitude adjustments required by the secret, as likely to work as asking for " a new bike " for example?JChris 21:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC) * Other things being equal, asking for something positive is better than asking for something specific for the simple reason that the human mind is incapable of knowing the best possible outcome and often seeks after that which it will later regret or reject. Other things being equal means that given the intensity of the aspiration/asking is equal the general aspiration is far better than the specific. In effect it means asking the universe or life or your own inmost being or the divine to decide what is best for you rather than relying on the limited mind. garry 21:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC) Darfur Recently in an article in Maclean's magazine, a sociologist and asst. professor of religious studies criticzed the Secret as it put all blame for negative events on the head of individual.He suggests that the authors should visit a womens shelter or go to Darfur and ask if they all are deserving of their fates.The secret states the universe is constantly responding to our inner desires. And it is not difficult to see how some individuals actually desire their fates at a subconcious level, but it seems difficult to imagine how each individual in the World Trade Centers for example, (or any other mass disaster) could all be in a similiar inner condition at the same time. Surely some of these people were positive in their outlook, and looking forward with intense aspiration to something? *These are complex and controversial issues which the Secret wisely avoids whether or not they really know the answer or not. It goes to the root cause of suffering and evil in the world which every religion has struggled to address and it requires a wider perspective of human evolution to answer it satisfactorily. Such questions can be addressed on Human Science. * However, not when asked by people like the sociologist who are only trying to avoid a rational consideration of the whole issue and look for a way to dismiss it. If the sociologist tells us what aspects or the truths of the Secret he agrees with or concedes, if he says he has tried the method in his own life and it has worked and he has seen that his own attitude does determine results but in good conscience he cannot accept this explanation for Darfur and WTC, then we have a serious context within which to discuss the issue. * But without addressing the central issue of the Secret, without attempting it, without assessing its power, to dismiss and condemn it by taking the argument to its furthest possible conclusion is an act of insincerity and no argument, no matter how rational or how well documented, will communicate in that context. * For one who really wants to understand the answer to this question, it is best not to start with Darfur or WTC but rather with our own lives. If one sincerely reviews his own life he can observe that there is an inner 'sanction' or corresponding relationship with external events we categorize as positive or negative. The correspondence may not immediately be clear in every case even when a general pattern of correspondence emerges. A more careful introspection and study of Life as described in the site can gradually fill in the gaps. If such correspondences fully reveal and one is convinced of the truth of it, then the question arises as to whether it is true for everyone in every situation. If the correspondences do not reveal in one's own life and if the very notion is rejected, then there is no meaning in asking about Darfur and WTC. For those who genuinely try and struggle for insight, the content of Human Science and raising questions on the Secret forum can help.garry 21:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)